Bill Clinton doesn’t like all the rumors and misinformation that seem to be floating around on the internet. He thinks the United Nations or the U.S. Government should create an agency to police the loose talk.

The agency, Clinton said, would “have to be totally transparent about where the money came from” and would have to be “independent” because “if it’s a government agency in a traditional sense, it would have no credibility whatever, particularly with a lot of the people who are most active on the internet.”

Let’s say the U.S. did it, it would have to be an independent federal agency that no president could countermand or anything else because people wouldn’t think you were just censoring the news and giving a different falsehood out.That is, it would be like, I don’t know, National Public Radio or BBC or something like that, except it would have to be really independent and they would not express opinions, and their mandate would be narrowly confined to identifying relevant factual errors. And also, they would also have to have citations so that they could be checked in case they made a mistake. Somebody needs to be doing it, and maybe it’s a worthy expenditure of taxpayer money.

There is some suggestion in the Politico article that Mr. Clinton may have had Wikileaks in mind, but still—for a former president, fully aware of the ability of government to violate the rights of citizens, to suggest such a thing is appalling. And as paragons of truth and virtue to offer up the very liberal NPR and the very far left BBC as judges of what is true on the internet is simply absurd.

Perhaps it does not seem so to the former president, for liberals see every conservative fact as a lie and only liberal claims as true. We once shared facts, at least, and differed on the policies the facts suggested. Now we no longer even share facts. All is politics and politics is all.